https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/36018d7260415422b46f14ca0c0d228a.pdf 274c3d831e2ce8a4ed75623bb8270a03 PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes May 21, 2020 The regular meeting was held via Zoom webinar and called to order at 8:00 PM by Chairperson Marjorie Hsu. Residents could not attend in person due to the COVID- 19 pandemic, but could participate by phone and video. The Board and applicants participated by videoconferencing. Chairperson Hsu stated all the Board members are in attendance. Present: Marjorie Hsu, Chairperson Matthew Brennan Erin Carney Thomas Andruss Kersten Harries Lindsay Krakauer Ed McCarthy Also Present: Clinton Smith, Village Attorney David Smith, Village Planner James Natarelli, Village Engineer Jennifer Martinez, Consulting Engineer Anthony Catalano, Consulting Engineer Sean McCarthy, Village Architect Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Agenda: 1) Landrock LLC, 231 Webber Avenue, Final subdivision plat - Continued public hearing 2) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, 199 Beekman Avenue, Phase III preliminary subdivision and roads and infrastructure site plan- Continued public hearing, draft resolution 3) Roger Billharz, 467 Munroe Avenue, Proposed subdivision, preliminary plat-Public hearing 4) Anthony and Nicole De Felippis, 18 Fremont Road, Tree removal appeal - Discussion 5) Sleepy Hollow Local Development Corp., 193 Beekman Avenue, Strategic Property Development Zoning Code, Re-zoning petition-Discussion 6) Sleepy Hollow Local Development Corp., 60 Continental Street, East Parcel filling operations permit amendment -Discussion 7) Jonathan Villani, 30 Andrews Lane, Proposed townhome development - Discussion 8) Rock of Salvation Church, 131 Cortlandt Street, Proposed parking lot- Preliminary presentation 9) Approval of minutes - April 16, 2020 Sean McCarthy read the following statement: 1 (5/21/20) �Tonight's meeting is convened in accordance with the Governor's Executive Order Number 202.1 issued March 13,2020 which suspends certain provisions of the New York State Open Meetings Law to allow a municipal board to convene a meeting via videoconferencing. In accordance with the Executive Order, the public has been provided with the ability to view tonight's meeting and public hearings, and a transcript will be provided at a later date. I have also confirmed with the Village Clerk that this meeting has been duly noticed by posting a notice on the Villages' bulletin board, the Journal News newspaper, and posting a copy on the Village website. Be advised that tonight's meeting is being aired live on cable television and streaming live on YouTube. Chairperson Hsu read the agenda and polled the Board members for attendance. 1. Landrock LLC, 231 Webber Avenue, Final subdivision plat- Continued public hearing Motion was made to open the public hearing. Moved: Brennan Seconded: McCarthy Vote 7-0 William Null is a Partner with Cuddy & Feder LLP representing Landrock LLC for the proposed subdivision application. Mr. Null stated that since the Preliminary Subdivision Plat approval on October 17, 2019, they have been working with the Village and the Westchester County Board of Health to get the Final Subdivision Plat signed and ready to submit to the Planning Board. The request for an easement has been submitted to the Village to coordinate with New York State as per the condition to extend the water main system to connect to the 12 inch Village water main on the Rockefeller State Park Lands. Mr. Null stated that the extension of the water main is the only change proposed to Gorey Brook Road. The declaration of covenants will include restrictions to the motor vehicle use on Gorey Brook Road by lots one and two of the proposed subdivision and will be submitted to the Village to approve when the filed subdivision map is recorded with the County. The access to the Rockefeller State Park, through Gorey Brook Road, runs by privately owned land that had been in the Rockefeller family for over one-hundred years and access to what is now Rockefeller State Park has been provided through the generosity of the Rockefeller family, and they are not proposing to change it by the filing of the subdivision map. They are proposing to develop three lots and there are no changes to Gorey Brook Road based on what has been submitted. Mr. Null stated there have been no changes added to the Plat since the Preliminary Subdivision Plat approval. They have incorporated the requested notes and the easement modifications. Donna Maiello is a Senior Associate and Landscape Architect at Divney Tung Schwalbe, LLP representing Landrock, LLC. Ms. Maiello stated that there have been slight refinements made to the subdivision plat as requested by the Village and the Westchester County Department of Health. The water supply system was extended north so it can be connected to the Villages' existing water supply system to create a looped system. A portion of the extension passes through the Rockefeller State Park Preserve property so they have assisted in submitting a request to the New York State Department of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to grant an easement through the Park Preserve for this connection. Ms. Maiello stated that as per Linda Cooper, Regional Director, of the New York State Department of Parks, Recreation and 2 (5/21/20) �Historic Preservation, the project has to be entered into the Cultural Resource online system so that it can be reviewed by their Technical Services Bureau. Ms. Maiello stated that the applicant will be completing this application and will contact Sean McCarthy and James Natarelli for additional information if needed. As per the request of the Village, Easement D, the water and sanitary sewer easement, was extended so that it includes the entire length of Gorey Brook Road within the boundaries of Landrock LLC. Easement A, the access and driveway maintenance easement, was shortened so that it terminates at the north east corner of the proposed lot three rather than extending it down to and include Gorey Brook Road. As per the Villages' request, changes to the notes were made on the plat. Note number six was added to say: The ownership of the underlying fee interest to Gorey Brook Road is not determinative of the ownership or use of the bed of Gorey Brook Road. William Null stated that note number six was a condition of the Preliminary Plat approval. Donna Maiello stated that as per the request of the Westchester County Department of Health, note number seven was added to say: The sanitary sewer was approved under permit SS13-002 and is being submitted for Final Approval by the Department of Health with the development of this Subdivision. Donna Maiello stated that James Natarelli had some questions regarding the sanitary sewer approval. Mark Shogren, the Project Civil Engineer will be available to answer questions and James Natarelli will reach out to Anthony Kunny, Assistant Engineer from the Department of Health for answers to other questions. Ms. Maiello stated that as part of the realty subdivision application, other documents were submitted for review by the Village, Village consultants and the Department of Health including an engineer's report, water main application extension drawings, including construction plans and details. The drawings, the report, and the final plat were reviewed and approved, and the final plat was signed by the Westchester County Health Department. William Null stated that the area of the easement that will be a Village of Sleepy Hollow easement, if granted by the Rockefeller State Park, and appears to extend into the Old Croton Aqueduct, is redundant to the existing easement for the current Village water main. The easement extends on either side of the anticipated water main location and the purpose of the easement is to allow maintenance access. Mr. Null stated that although they would agree to revise the plat and having it signed by the County, that area of encroachment is not an area where the Village needs an easement for the water main maintenance access. Mr. Null stated Michael and Tara Rockefeller, members of their family, and maintenance personnel have used Gorey Brook Road for motor vehicle access at times in order to get in and out of the property. Mr. Null stated that the Planning Board does not have jurisdiction to change the Rockefeller's legal rights to use Gorey Brook Road. They are not proposing to expand the motor vehicle usage but the access to their property over the existing road has been in place for over one-hundred years. Mr. Null stated that the applicable law on final subdivision plats is that if a final subdivision plat is submitted to be substantially compliant with the approved preliminary subdivision plat, the final 3 (5/21/20) �subdivision plat should be approved. The final plat submitted shows that they have complied with the Preliminary Subdivision Plat approval. Chairperson Hsu stated that the Planning Board is not taking a position and not making a statement with regards to Gorey Brook Road for motor vehicles. Matthew Brennan asked Clinton Smith if the note number six, related to the easement, compromises the Village current position as an open item. Clinton Smith stated that note number six doesn't compromise the Village and it means that the ownership of the land is not determinative of the road that rests on top of the land and is referenced to the fact that Gorey Brook Road is a historic road and has been maintained by the Village. Mr. Smith stated that because the road is shown on Landrock's property survey, it is not determinative that Gorey Brook Road is a public road. Chairperson Hsu solicited comments from the public. David Steinmetz of Zarin & Steinmetz is the attorney representing John and Carol Lyden and stated that a letter was submitted to the Planning Board on May 20, 2020 (see attached exhibit #1) to layout their position and concerns as it relates to Gorey Brook Road. Mr. Steinmetz stated that it is his understanding that a petition has been submitted to the Board, from a number of neighbors who share their position and concerns regarding Gorey Brook Road. Mr. Steinmetz stated that the Lyden's do not object to the proposed subdivision but are concerned about the proposed use of Gorey Brook Road and the lack of clarity in the administrative record. Discussions from the applicant for the possible uses of Gorey Brook Road have included emergency access, improvements to the road, fences, gates, and drainage site improvements. Mr. Steinmetz stated that William Null has stated that these issues will be addressed during later site plan approvals. Mr. Steinmetz stated that addressing the proposed uses of Gorey Brook Road during site plan approvals would create a situation of unlawful segmentation. Mr. Steinmetz quoted members of the Planning Board and statements they made during the Work Session. Mr. Steimetz stated that if they wait to address the concerns at site plan approvals, it allows three lots to be created without nailing down what will happen to Gorey Brook Road and will be deferring the most significant aspect of the subdivision. Mr. Steinmetz stated that he strongly urges the Planning Board not to sign off on a plat that includes the note number six and that the note attempts to adjudicate the private rights between Landrock and his clients. The Planning Board does not have the jurisdiction to adjudicate the existing or lack of a pedestrian easement on a plat. The note number six should be removed from the subdivision plat. Tammy Gales lives at 32 Gorey Brook Road. She read the letter that was submitted with a petition to the Planning Board on May 21, 2020 on behalf the residents of Gorey Brook Road and Ridge Road to express objections to motor vehicle access on Gorey Brook Road. (see exhibit #2 ). Ms. Gales stated that she could provide an updated petition with more signatures if permitted. Chairperson Hsu stated that Tammy Gales is welcome to submit an updated petition to the Building Department for the Planning Board. 4 (5/21/20) �Lauren Connell lives at 5 Pleasant Street and questioned what will happen to the gravel access path between Sleepy Hollow Road and Gorey Brook Road that provides two access points to Rockefeller State Preserve. William Null stated that the gravel path area is an existing driveway path that is privately owned Landrock property of which Michael and Tara Rockefeller have permitted the public to use. Once the three houses are built, the path will not be accessible for public use. There are alternate ways to get into the Park. Lauren Connell asked how the gravel path is different that than the use of Gorey Brook Road. William Null stated that the gravel access path may be closed to the public without the subdivision approval. There are no proposed improvements to Gorey Brook Road at this time other than the occasional vehicle use by the property owners. Clinton Smith stated that Gorey Brook Road is a Historical Road that has been maintained by the Village in the past, which by common- law is a public road. The Village has not maintained the privately owned gravel path and it has been blocked off for some time. William Null stated the area of Gorey Brook Road in question has been maintained by Michael and the Rockefellers for decades and has not been maintained by the Village. David Steinmetz reiterated the statements made by William Null and stated that the intentions for Gorey Brook Road must be clarified for the record before the three lots are developed. Tammy Gales requested a deadline date to submit additional petition signatures and comments from the public. Sean McCarthy stated the next Planning Board meeting is June 18, 2020 and that if the public hearing remains open, the Building Department could receive additional submissions up until that date. Chairperson Hsu asked if the public comments could remain open for a period of time even if the public hearing is closed at tonight's meeting. Sean McCarthy stated that if the public hearing is closed, a deadline for public comments should be established. William Null objected to Mr. Steinmetz's comments made on the applicant's intentions of the use of Gorey Brook Road and that the issues between the applicant and Mr. Steinmetz's clients are a civil matter. Mr. Null stated that the intentions for the three lots are clear in the restrictions that they have set for the use of Gorey Brook Road for occasional motor vehicle access. Mr. Steinmetz requested that a note be added to the Final Subdivision Plat to say: 5 (5/21/20) �"Gorey Brook Road shall be maintained in its' bucolic state and condition but it shall remain open and accessible to the public for allforms of non-motorized access to include pedestrians, horses, horse drawn carriages, joggers, and alike " Mr. Steinmetz requested that the letter received from the Parks Department be shared with the public. Seth Markowitz, the owner of 5 Pleasant Street, asked for a confirmation of the vehicle use that is proposed for Gorey Brook Road. William Null stated that it is proposed that lots one and two will not have motor vehicle access, lot three will continue to have vehicular access, and that the principle access for all three lots will be from Webber Avenue. Susan Lewenz is the owner of 41 Gorey Brook Road and stated that there has been no vehicular traffic allowed on the Gorey Brook Road and that is what they request continues. William Null stated that the Rockefellers have driven on Gorey Brook Road for many years to access their property. Chairperson Hsu stated that based on information discussed with the Village, Gorey Brook Road is used by maintenance vehicles for access on an occasional basis. Lauren Connell stated that she has never witnessed vehicular use on Gorey Brook Road. William Null stated that pictures have been submitted to prove the occasional vehicular use of Gorey Brook Road and the Board should not strip his clients' rights to use their property. Chairperson Hsu asked Linda Cooper to read the letter she submitted on behalf of the State Parks Department. Linda Cooper, Regional Director for the Taconic Division of the New York, Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation. She read the letter submitted to the Planning Board dated May 20, 2020 (see exhibit #3) Chairperson Hsu stated that it is the general consensus amongst the applicant, the neighboring residents, and the Planning Board to maintain the current state of Gorey Brook Road. Motion was made to close the public hearing and to accept written public comments until the close of business on May 29, 2020. Moved: Andruss Seconded: Harries Chairperson Hsu - yes Thomas Andruss - yes Matthew Brennan -abstained Kersten Harries - yes 6 (5/21/20) �Lindsay Krakauer - yes Erin Carney - yes Edward McCarthy - yes Vote 6-0-1 APPROVED William Null stated that they will coordinate revisions if needed for the triangular area on the plat; they have submitted the request for the easement for coordination with the Village, and plan to submit the state wide cultural review with the Parks Department. 3. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, 199 Beekman Avenue, Phase III preliminary subdivision and roads and infrastructure site plan- Continued public hearing Andrew Tung is an associate of Divney Tung Schwalbe LLP representing the applicant. Mr. Tung stated that the request is for the approval of expansion of the site work adjoining the Phase III roadways required to complete the site filling preparation operations. Mr. Tung stated that they are in receipt of the comments from the engineering consultants and Sean McCarthy. They believe they can address the majority of the comments with conditions. Mr. Tung stated that it was suggested by Sean McCarthy that some of the memo items be addressed with the Planning Board. Motion was made to open the public hearing. Moved: Andruss Seconded: Krakauer Vote 7-0 Chairperson Hsu solicited comments from the Board. There were no comments from the Board. Chairperson Hsu asked Sean McCarthy if there were specific items from his review memo that should be discussed or can they be handled with conditions on the resolutions. Sean McCarthy stated that the open items from his review memo have been referenced as a conditions of approval unless the Board members have any questions. Kersten Harries stated that she is in agreement with the recommendations from Sean McCarthy's memo and the conditions that have been incorporated into the resolution. David Smith stated that the resolution before the Board is similar to what the Planning Board has considered in part for Phase II. David Smith summarized the additional conditions added to the resolution for approval as per Sean McCarthy's and Anthony Catalano's recommendations Peter Chavkin, Managing Partner for Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, read item number thirty-nine from Sean McCarthy's memo which recommended including street-tree landscape lighting on Lighthouse Landing and Westward Drive and stated that their response was that the applicant is not proposing such lighting along with Phase III roadways, as no such lighting was included in either the Phase I or Phase II roadways. Mr. Chavkin stated that there will be ample 7 (5/21/20) �street lighting and that since the street trees will be owned by the Village, it would require additional Village maintenance. Mr. Chavkin requested that this recommendation will not be a condition of the site plan approval. Chairperson Hsu asked Sean McCarthy to speak on the recommendation of street-tree lighting. Sean McCarthy stated that his recommendation intended to propose electrical sources to the street-trees for future events and decorative purposes. Providing conduits now will provide safer options in the future for business owners in the mixed use and commercial areas of the development. Peter Chavkin stated that he appreciates the explanation and agrees to provide the infrastructure for possible street-tree lighting in the recommended areas. Chairperson Hsu asked if it is possible to address the earlier phases I and II and add the additional infrastructure. Sean McCarthy stated that he anticipated the options being helpful in the commercial, mixed-use areas where there will be more night life and traffic and doesn't think it will be necessary in the residential areas. Craig Tompkins, Project Manager for Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC stated that they have already included GFI outlets mounted on the tops of street light poles down Maxwell and Westward Drive. Ed McCarthy asked Sean McCarthy if Con Edison has provided location maps for their above ground equipment. Sean McCarthy stated that a condition will be in the resolution to request that all above ground utility equipment locations be documented on the plans for approval prior to Building Permit approval. Chairperson Hsu solicited comments from the public. There were no comments from the public. Motion was made to close the public hearing. Moved: Andruss Seconded: McCarthy Vote 7-0 Motion was made to adopt the resolution. Moved: Brennan Seconded: Andruss Chairperson Hsu - yes Thomas Andruss - yes Matthew Brennan - yes Kersten Harries - yes 8 (5/21/20) �Lindsay Krakauer - yes Erin Carney - yes Edward McCarthy - yes Vote 7-0 APPROVED 4. Roger Billharz, 467 Munroe Avenue, Proposed subdivision-preliminary plat - Public Hearing Motion was made to open the public hearing. Moved: Andruss Seconded: Harries Vote 7-0 Gregory Gall, RA is the architect representing the applicants and stated that a revised subdivision plat and plot plan has been submitted to include contours, wooded areas, utilities and the location of proposed divided property line. The proposed subdivision is as of right in regards to Zoning. Chairperson Hsu stated that the revised subdivision plat submitted addresses all of the conditions from the comments of the Village Planner and the Village Engineer. James Natarelli stated that the plat revision addresses all of his comments and concerns. Kersten Harries asked if a draft resolution has been prepared. David Smith stated that a draft resolution has been prepared for the subdivision of the property into two conforming lots with the understanding that any future plans to build a residence on one of the lots, would be required to submit an application for site plan approval to the Planning Board. Sean Bell Thompson is the owner of 465 Munroe Avenue and asked if there are current maintenance issues for the lots. Clinton Smith stated that maintenance compliance issues are in the jurisdiction of Sean McCarthy and the Building Department. Chairperson Hsu stated that compliance with street parking seems to be an issue on the property and asked the applicant to speak on the subject. Roger Billharz is the owner of 467 Munroe Avenue and stated that they are working on the current street parking violations. Sean Bell Thompson asked if resolving of the street parking violation could be a condition of the subdivision approval. Clinton Smith stated that street parking violations are unrelated to the subdivision application. Roget Billharz stated that subdivision of his property is not related to parking cars on the street. 9 (5/21/20) �There were no other public comments. Motion was made to close the public hearing. Moved: Harries Seconded: Andruss Vote 7-0 Motion was made to adopt the resolution. Moved: Andruss Seconded: Harries Chairperson Hsu - yes Thomas Andruss - yes Matthew Brennan - yes Kersten Harries - yes Lindsay Krakauer - yes Erin Carney - yes Edward McCarthy - abstained Vote 6-0-1 APPROVED 5. Anthony and Nicole De Felippis, 18 Fremont Road, Tree removal appeal- Discussion Chairperson Hsu stated the Planning Board has received the invoice from their tree service company and asked Anthony De Felippis to speak on updates of the tree appeal. Anthony De Felippis stated that as per the Boards request, they contracted an arborist to look at the tree and they said the tree should be removed. They sent the letter to the Village. Chairperson Hsu stated that they did not receive any documentation or responses from the Tree Commission at last month's meeting regarding the application. Chairperson Hsu solicited comments from the Board. Matthew Brennan asked Mr. De Fellipis if the source of the root rot sited in the letter from the arborist was connected to the construction of the patio. Anthony De Felippis stated that the tree is old and that the patio is three feet below where the tree is and did not cause damage to the roots of the tree. Chairperson Hsu solicited comments from the Tree Commission. Francios Rjeili is a member of the Tree Commission and stated that he could not appear at the last meeting but did listen to the meeting and then contacted Mr. De Felippis to suggest that he hire an independent arborist for an opinion on the condition of the tree. Mr. Rjeili stated that based on the arborist report, he proposes that the Planning Board approves the application with the code conditions for tree replacements. Chairperson Hsu asked the applicant what they plan for the tree replacements. 10 (5/21/20) �Anthony De Felippis stated that he plans to plant Pine trees as replacements within six months of the removals. Motion was made to approve the Tree Appeal application to remove (1) Beech Tree with the condition to plant two replacement trees. Moved: McCarthy Seconded: Andruss Chairperson Hsu - yes Thomas Andruss - yes Matthew Brennan - yes Kersten Harries - yes Lindsay Krakauer - yes Erin Carney - yes Edward McCarthy - yes Vote 7-0 APPROVED 6. Sleepy Hollow Local Development Corp., 193 Beekman Avenue, Strategic PropertyStrategic Property Development Zoning Code, Re-zoning petition- Discussion Mayor Ken Wray stated that since there have been discussions in the past regarding this application, he asked if there are any questions from the Board members. There were no further questions from the Board. Clinton Smith asked Chairperson Hsu if the Board would like to provide a formal response to the Board of Trustees. Chairperson Hsu stated that the Planning Board provided written comments at the time of the last discussion and the Board is comfortable letting those comments stand. David Smith stated the correspondence from the Planning Board was submitted on January 20, 2020 to the Village Board in relation to the consideration for the adoption of the creation of the Strategic Floating Zone into the Villages' Zoning Code text and maps. Prior to the Board of Trustees closing the public hearing and adopting the Floating Zone petition, the Board discussed and incorporated some of the comments into changes to the Floating Zone petition text. The next step is deciding whether or not to land the Floating Zone on the 193 Beekman Avenue property project. Chairperson Hsu stated that the Board of Trustees will now decide when to act on the Floating Zone and when there is an application submitted to develop the property at 193 Beekman Avenue, the Planning Board will have an opportunity to influence the development. No action was taken. 6. Sleepy Hollow Local Development Corp., 60 Continental Street, East Parcel filling operations permit amendment- Discussion 11 (5/21/20) �Mayor Ken Wray stated that the LDC is requesting approval to allow an increase in the number of truck trips from 75 trucks per day to 100 trucks per day to bring fill into the East Parcel. Since schools have been closed, there isn't a need for the normal street shutdown period in the morning and the afternoon. The LDC also has the opportunity to bring in clean DEC approved fill for the East Parcel from a source where they do not pay a cost for the fill or the trucking of the fill to the site. The LDC will still need to pay the $4.50 per yard of fill for testing of the fill, and to determined where it came from, and where it will go on site. Mayor Wray stated that by increasing the number of truck trips and the amount of fill that can be brought in now, they will be able to complete the filling operations sooner and could be finished by early summer and lessen the impact to the neighborhood streets. Chairperson Hsu asked if there have been any complaints from the neighbors from the increase in trucks from 50 truck trips per day to 75 truck trips per day. Mayor Wray stated that there haven't been any complaints regarding the truck trip increases and that the complaints that have been received for traffic issues have been addressed with the contractors and the Village staff to eliminate the wrong way use of Continental Street and to coordinate the truck traffic on Pocantico Street and Clinton Street. Mayor Wray stated that there is camera system installed on the site and along Continental Street so that issues can be addressed when they occur and so there is a record of it. Mayor Wray stated that he has also met with residents in the neighboring streets to keep them informed on the progress and to hear their concerns. Mayor Wray stated that he hasn't adopted a formal format for community meetings yet. Chairperson Hsu solicited comments from the Board. There were no comments from the Board. Chairperson Hsu requested that the trucks continue to be respectful to pedestrians and cyclists on the streets affected by the truck delivery routes. David Smith stated while he does not have a formal resolution drafted, the last amendment resolution approval reflected the letter request for the increase in truck trips and referred to the conditions adopted in the Planning Boards February 22, 2018 Site Plan approval. Motion was made to grant the site plan amendment to grant 100 truck deliveries per day subject to the same conditions set forth in prior resolution. Moved: Chairperson Hsu Seconded: Brennan Chairperson Hsu - yes Thomas Andruss - yes Matthew Brennan - yes Kersten Harries - yes Lindsay Krakauer - yes Erin Carney - yes 12 (5/21/20) �Edward McCarthy - yes Vote 7-0 APPROVED 7. Jonathan Villani, 30 Andrews Lane, Proposed townhome development- Discussion Jonathan Villani is the Design Consultant for 30 Andrews Lane. Mr. Villani stated that they propose to construct nine townhouses that are roughly 1,600 square feet per unit. Mr. Villani stated that he wanted to review the proposed changes of the townhomes with the Planning Board before going to the Zoning Board and the Village Board of Trustees. The building heights have been lowered to three stories to be more aesthetically pleasing to the neighborhood. The units have been shifted slightly to be in line and the end units have been shifted forward in the same general locations. The building units have changed in size from 17.5 feet wide by 31 feet long to 15.9 feet wide by 34 feet long and affect the building coverage. Mr. Villani stated that he received the comments from David Smith and Sean McCarthy and that he will address them with plan revisions, but would like to get approval from the Board on the building configurations and changes before he moves forward with making the final revisions to the site plan drawings. Thomas Andruss asked if the intention is to use natural gas and how does he plan to move forward with the Con-Edison moratorium. Jonathan Villani stated that the future owner had a plumber file for the applications with the Con-Edison engineers to have this project fulfilled as part of a previous application. Chairperson Hsu asked Mr. Villani if ground and air sourced sustainable energy heating and cooling has been considered with the future owner as requested by the Board. Jonathan Villani stated that the owner has agreed to solar ready options and they have redesigned the roof lines to allow for solar panel capabilities as alternate heat sources. They are also discussing the installation of power sources in the garages for charging hybrid vehicles. Erin Carney stated the majority of the shrubs, grasses, and ground coverings in the landscape plan are not native species. There are great ecological benefits to having native base line plants and there are plenty of native substitutions for the plants listed on the plan. Ms. Carney suggesting diversifying the species of the seven trees proposed in the front and back of the development. Jonathan Villani stated that he will speak with the Landscape Architect on incorporating native species and diversification into the Landscape Plan. Kersten Harries requested that Jonathan Villani look at the design to see if he can adjust the new configurations so that there is still a sense of separation between the units. Ms. Harries questioned how the attic space will be used now that the buildings have been reduced to three floors. Ms. Harries agreed with Sean McCarthy's recommendation to move the paths for the buildings along Andrews Lane to continue onto the main sidewalks instead of the secondary path. 13 (5/21/20) �Jonathan Villani stated that the attic space will be storage space and for mechanical equipment and that he will make the change from the paths to the sidewalks. Lindsey Krakauer asked Mr. Villani to confirm if there is a basement space. Jonathan Villani stated that the units will not have a basement. There will be ground level garage spaces with crawl space storage and some finished storage space with possibly a place to store trash. Jonathan Villani asked Sean McCarthy if he agrees that he could go to the Zoning Board and the Village Board for approvals based on this current design. Sean McCarthy stated that he agrees that he is prepared to submit to the Zoning Board and the Village Board for approvals. Jonathan Villani asked David Smith if a public hearing could be scheduled with the Planning Board prior to the Zoning Board and Village Board approval. David Smith stated that he should have the variance and the petition approved by the Village Board before requesting a public hearing with the Planning Board. Jonathan Villani asked Sean McCarthy if he agrees with the increase in the building developmental coverage calculations. Sean McCarthy stated that he will trust that his calculations on the plans are correct. Chairperson Hsu stated that the deadline for the Zoning Board submission for the June meeting has passed and suggested that if he could revise the development drawings to adjust the building coverage overage so it does not required a variance; and then maybe the Board could vote to schedule a public hearing after the Board of Trustees approves the ingress and egress petition. Jonathan Villani stated that they have moved to modular construction for the buildings and that he could speak to the company to see if they could reduce the size of the buildings to reduce the coverage and eliminate the need for a variance. Kersten Harries asked if it would be helpful to schedule a tentative date for the public hearing pending receipt of the approvals from the other Boards. Clinton Smith discouraged scheduling a public hearing before the Board of Trustees and the Zoning Board of Appeals have made their decisions. Sean McCarthy stated that due to the statutory time period for having the public notice in the newspaper, without having a definitive date of when the Board of Trustees will hear the petition, it is impossible to set a date for the Planning Board public hearing. Mr. McCarthy stated that the Board is aware of what he will be requesting and suggested submitting a letter to the Board of Trustees as soon as possible to expedite getting on their agenda. 14 (5/21/20) �No action was taken. 8. Rock of Salvation Church, 131 Cortland Street, Proposed parking lot- Preliminary presentation Jorge B. Hernandez, RA is the architect representing the applicant. Mr. Hernandez stated that the church is located at 131 Cortlandt Street and the lot they propose to develop is on 135 Cortlandt Street. There is currently an empty space between the church and 139 Cortlandt Street. Previously, there was a building on 135 Cortlandt Street that was demolished with the intention to build a parking lot to be used by the church. Site plan approval for the parking lot was approved by the Planning Board in 2015 to include conditions of which were not met or not approved. The new application proposes to construct a similar parking lot that includes an easement agreement with current owners of 139 Cortlandt Street and a gate. The verbal easement agreement for ingress and egress to the property is being finalized with the owners of 139 Cortlandt Street. In 2015, the Planning Board denied the proposed gate due to concerns of the gates accessibility and the queuing from the street to get in to the parking lot. The concerns of the church were how the parking lot is used during the evening hours by the businesses across the street. They are now proposing to keep the gate open during the day and close it between the hours of 10:00 PM to 6:00 AM to prevent the use of the parking lot overnight from neighboring properties. The owners and occupants of 139 Cortland Street will have access to the property for egress and will have a key or automatic opener that will allow them to get in and out of the gate during the closed hours. Lindsay Krakauer asked if the tenants using the egress are aware of the proposed gate. Jorge Hernandez stated that the gate will be on the Rock of Salvation property and that the egress and the gate will be a part of the easement agreement with 139 Cortlandt Street. There is also another entrance to 139 Cortlandt Street. Chairperson Hsu asked Mr. Hernandez if he was the architect on the prior application. Jorge Hernandez stated that he was the architect on the prior application. Chairperson Hsu asked why the church did not act on the previous approval for the parking lot. Jorge Hernandez stated that the Rock of Salvation Church wanted to find a way to include the gate and they couldn't reach an easement agreement with the prior owner of 139 Cortlandt Street. Erin Carney stated that the proposed parking lot increases the impervious surface of the property and asked if there is a way to address the heat island effect that the increase in pavement will create in the area. Jorge Hernandez stated that it was previously impervious surface when the building existed. 15 (5/21/20) �Chairperson Hsu questioned if the proposed gate closure hours would be active seven days a week; if the proposed parking lot will only be used during church services, and where the parishioners currently park. Jorge Hernandez stated that the proposed gate closure hours will be in effect seven days a week. The parking lot will be used only during church services, which are mainly on Sunday and some weeknights. The parishioners currently park either on the street or in a remote parking lot which makes it difficult during services. Lindsay Krakauer asked who will be responsible for the opening and locking of the gate. Jorge Hernandez stated there will be a remote system or someone from the church will be responsible. Chairperson Hsu asked if there were specific incidents with neighboring establishments. Jorge Hernandez stated that there were previous incidents and that the Pastor could speak of them when it is not a public meeting. James Natarelli asked if he received the memo that he prepared and stated that it is most important that all of the existing or proposed easements are shown on the plan including the access easement and the drainage easement for the adjacent property. Mr. Natarelli requested a vehicular maneuvering diagram for the gate and how it will affect street traffic. Jorge Hernandez stated that he will prepare revisions to address Mr. Natarellis review memo and the gate is now proposed to be open for most of the day to avoid queuing from the street and be available to only those who have access during the overnight hours when there should be less traffic concerns. He will provide a maneuvering plan as part of his next submission. Chairperson Hsu stated that the next Planning Board meeting is June 18, 2020 and asked Clinton if they should schedule the public hearing. Clinton Smith suggested waiting until the easement agreement is finalized before scheduling a public hearing. Sean McCarthy and David Smith both agreed that the easement agreement should be finalized before scheduling a public hearing. No action was taken. 9. Approval of minutes- April 16, 2020 Motion was made to approve the April 16, 2020 minutes. Moved: Andruss Seconded: Krakauer Chairperson Hsu - yes 16 (5/21/20) �Thomas Andruss - yes Matthew Brennan - yes Kersten Harries - yes Lindsay Krakauer - yes Erin Carney - yes Edward McCarthy - yes Vote 7-0 APPROVED Motion was made to adjourn the meeting at 10:58 PM. Moved: Chairperson Hsu Seconded: Harries Vote 7-0 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 17 (5/21/20) �David S. Steinmetz • W\fI Z A R I N & STEINMETZ david@ sarin- steinmetz.com • &lso admitted inDC May 21, 2020 Planning Board Minutes - Exhibit #1 May 20, 2020 By Electronic Mail Hon. Marjorie Hsu Chairperson, and Members of the Planning Board Village of Sleepy Hollow 28 Beekman Avenue Sleepy Hollow, New York 10591 Re: Landrock, LLC Subdivision Application: 231 Webber Avenue Dear Chairperson Hsu and Members of the Planning Board: As you know, this Firm represents Carol Lyden and Dr. John Lyden, owners of property located at 150 Gory Brook Road, immediately adjacent to and south of Landrock LLC's proposed three (3) lot residential subdivision at 231 Webber Avenue. You will recall that we appeared before your Board during the last session of the public hearing regarding the Preliminary Subdivision application on October 17, 2019. After the meeting, we followed up with a letter to the Board dated October 30, 2019 (a copy of which is attached hereto). Most recently, as represented by Landrock's counsel in its letter to the Board dated May 8, 2020, the Westchester County Department of Health ("DOH") has approved Landrock's Final Subdivision Plat, dated March 24, 2020 ("Final Plat"), and Landrock will presumably seek Final Subdivision Approval after the culmination of the Public Hearing which commences Thursday evening, May 21. As we previously stated both at the October 17, 2019 meeting, and in the attached letter, the Lydens do not, object to Landrock's proposed subdivision. We are writing now to reiterate, however, our clients' previously articulated concern regarding the lack of clarity in your Tel: (914)682-7800 Fax:(914)683-5490 81 Main Street, Suite 415 White Plains, New York 10601 www.zarin-steinmetz.com �« ZARIN & STEINMETZ Sleepy Hollow Planning Board May 20, 2020 Page|2 Administrative Record concerning Landrock's proposed use of Gory Brook Road. Until that is satisfactorily resolved, this Public Hearing must remain open. At the October 17 public hearing, both Chairperson Hsu and Board Member Kersten Harries expressed the important goal of preserving Gory Brook Road for use by the public to the same extent that it has been used for decades. See Minutes at 6-7.1 No member of the Board, nor its professional staff, disagreed with that proposition. Indeed, as the Minutes further reflect, Board Member Herries noted: "her understanding was that both the Board and applicant agreed that the current use of Gorey Brook Road was to remain for pedestrians, horse and non-vehicular traffic use." Minutes at 3. She further observed that: "the Board is clear in saying that their preference is to preserve the current uses of Gorey Brook Road and to keep the road accessible to public pedestrian and non-vehicular access." Minutes at 8. Likewise, Chairperson Hsu indicated that "the Board does not want improvements made to Gorey Brook Road and wants vehicular access to be eliminated." Minutes at 7. That vital and long-standing historic use, which again, the Lydens do not intend to interfere with in any way, has been for non-motorized vehicular travel only, including by pedestrians, joggers, horses and carriages. Gory Brook Road is a bucolic, unpaved, country way, which cannot handle regular vehicular use in its current state - nor should it. In recognition of this fact, the Board originally included as Condition 7 in the Resolution of Preliminary Subdivision Approval, the requirement that if Gory Brook Road ("GBR") were to be used for access to any of the newly subdivided lots (other than for emergency or incidental access), it would have to be improved to Village standards. The Applicant and its counsel objected to this condition, which we understand led to its removal in the Planning Board's Amended Resolution. Based upon the Applicant Team's public statements, however, it is currently far from clear that Landrock is prepared to forego: (i) seeking approval for at least one of the newly subdivided lots to use vehicles on GBR and (ii) making still undisclosed improvements to GBR. The record now reveals that the Applicant's counsel stated "the applicant does not want to be prohibited from motor vehicle access to Landrock's property [from GBR]." Minutes at 6. He further noted that a "gate and secondary driveway is not part of the subdivision application" but "would be part of a future site plan application for the second and third lots" if the applicant decides to file such a site plan application. Minutes at 6. Furthermore, as Landrock's Counsel expressed in his subsequent letter to the Board, dated October 31, 2019, the Applicant is apparently now also opposed to the public's continued use of Gory Brook Road -- even for non-motorized vehicular access. In sum, it remains entirely unclear in the Record to what degree, if any: the public would be able to traverse GBR; the newly created lots would potentially use Gory Brook Road for secondary access and/or emergency use; and what improvements (and obstructions) might ultimately be installed. In fact, the minutes reflect that the Applicant's Counsel admitted that a "secondary driveway is not part of this application and will be discussed as part of a future site 1 We recognize that the Minutes of the meeting are not necessarily exact quotes, but there is no stenographic transcript. To the extent that these are the "adopted Minutes," we do rely upon them. �« ZARIN & STEINMETZ Sleepy Hollow Planning Board May 20, 2020 Page|2 plan application." (Minutes at 5). Particularly since the Planning Board apparently shares the Lydens' concerns about use of Gory Brook Road, this issue must be resolved prior to the granting of Final Subdivision approval.2 Deferring consideration and analysis of the use of, and improvements to, Gory Brook Road until Site Plan Approval, we submit as a matter of law, would artificially minimize (or segment) the potential adverse impacts of the proposed subdivision and constitute improper and unlawful segmentation which is a violation of the SEQRA Regulations. See 6 NYCRR § 617.3(g).3 Consistent with the foregoing, and as stated in our October 30, 2019 letter, we respectfully request that your Resolution of Final Subdivision Plat approval contain a condition that states: "Gory Brook Road shall be maintained in its bucolic state and condition, but it shall remain open and accessible to the public for all forms of non-motorized access, including by pedestrians, horses, horse-drawn carriages, joggers and the like." Having this note on the Final Plat is not only consistent with the Board's stated goal of continued limited public use, but also crucial to Carol Lyden who has the right to traverse Gory Brook Road with her horses and carriages to access the Rockefeller Preserve.4 Finally, we feel obligated to share with your Board that when we inquired with the New York State Parks' Department and the Rockefeller Preserve officials whether Landrock had yet secured its "easement" for the northerly water line connection, we learned that the State Parks Regional Director had absolutely no idea that the GBR connection into the Preserve might be terminated, impeded and/or improved without the knowledge of and/or input from the State. Thus, as a result, if Landrock will not consent to the Note we have requested, we must urge your Board to table this matter, adjourn the Hearing and seek the input from NYS Parks since that Department has now become an Involved Agency under SEQRA. The Public's interest is now at stake and NYS Parks deserves a seat at the table. 5 2 Both Chairperson Hsu and Member Harries stated during the October 17 meeting that the Board should address use of Gory Brook Road by vehicles and otherwise as part of the Final Subdivision approval. See Minutes at 6-7. Hence, the Applicant cannot continue to hide the proverbial ball. 3 You are fortunate enough to be guided by extremely experienced professional staff who know quite well that the process being pursued before your Board lacks the degree of candor and customary full disclosure which is not only contemplated by SEQRA, but is exactly the kind of frank analysis to which your Board and the Sleepy Hollow community is entitled. 4 On a related matter, the Applicant has included on the Final Plat a note regarding its position that a certain 2003 Pedestrian and Equestrian Easement between it and our clients has been extinguished. The Lydens strongly disagree with this legal position and believe that the easement is still in effect. Nevertheless, this is a legal issue between private parties, and the Applicant's legal posturing is completely inappropriate before the Planning Board. Moreover, this unprecedented note simply does not belong on the recorded Subdivision Plat. We address this matter now only to demonstrate the importance of the Lydens' (and the public's) ability to continue to use Gory Brook Road for non-motorized vehicular access. This Note should be removed from the Plat and the Map should not be signed by the Chairperson with this language contained thereon. 5 For the Applicant to suddenly claim that it fears liability after decades of public use, combined with its arguments that General Obligations Law Section 9-103 provides no protections here is disingenuous. (See Null Letter 10/31/19). We submit that GOL 9-103 unquestionably provides that Landrock and its successors have "no �« ZARIN & STEINMETZ Sleepy Hollow Planning Board May 20, 2020 Page|2 Thank you very much for your attention to this matter. We look forward to appearing before your Board and addressing these issues again on Thursday evening. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully submitted, ZARIN & STEINMETZ By: David S. Steinmetz Marsha Rubin Goldstein DSS:me cc: via email with enclosure Carol and John Lyden William S. Null, Esq. Clinton B. Smith, Esq. Sean McCarthy David Smith, AICP duty to keep the premises safe for entry of others for ... hiking ... horseback riding [and] bicycle riding" - precisely the activities at issue here. Village Counsel must review this and advise your Board whether New York State Law affords sufficient protections here to ensure that the status quo is not altered. �May 21, 2020 Planning Board Minutes - Exhibit #2 RECEDED MAY 2 1 2020 BUILDING DEPT. VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW From: T a m m y Gales [mailto:tammygale5@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2020 10:22 AM To: Sean McCarthy Subject: Petition for the Planning Board Meeting Thursday, May 21, 7:30pm Dear Mr. McCarthy, I am attaching a petition signed by the residents of Goiy Brook Road and Ridge Road in Webber Park that expresses our STRONG objection to modifying Gory Brook Road and opening it to any kind of vehicles in conjunction with the Landrock development proposal. W e respectfully request that you present this petition to Mayor Wray and the Planning Board Committee prior to tonight's meeting on Thursday, May 21 at 7:30pm. W e further request that the Planning Board recognize and consider our petition at tonight's meeting. Thank you in advance for your time and attention to this petition. Best, T a m m y Gales 37 Gory Brook Road Sleepy Hollow, N Y 10591 �May 20.2020 Village of Sleepy Hollow 28 Beekman Avenue Sleepy Hollow, New York 10591 Dear Mayor Wray and Sleepy Hollow Board of Trustees. We are the residents of Gory Brook Road and Ridge Road in Webber Park. Sleepy Hollow, NY 10591. We have joined together to express our STRONG objection to the request to open Gory Brook Road for motor vehicle access with the newly proposed subdivision developments in Landrock's proposed plans. To be clear, we are not opposing the subdivision development, but we are strongly opposed to the request to open any portion of Gory Brook Road for vehicles. As several of the Village Board members very correctly stated in the October 17 public hearing, the "current use of Gorey Brook Road was to remain for pedestrians, horse and non-vehicular traffic use" ( Minutes at 3). We could not agree more! Some of the elderly neighbors who are joining in this petition and signed below have lived their entire lives in this neighborhood. It is vital to all of us, old and newer residents, that the nature of our neighborhood be preserved. We are an important confluence where walkers, joggers, runners and horses and carriages come together to access the lovely Rockefeller Preserve. This historic road is not built to withstand vehicle traffic nor should it be modified to do so. We wish for Gory Brook Road to retain its quiet, gentle and old-world charm that has sadly been lost to much of Sleepy Hollow. This road and its history to the region is a treasure that must be protected. Thank you in advance for your time. Respectfully, The Residents of Gory Brook Road and Ridge Road. Sleepy Hollow, NY 10591 Name (printed) Signature / Address �4 II: •V - J / f t - ^ ^ b'tfe-Lce. £ / <r/ i Com'Brooiclgc) Jr CwAy Pfi^nti HgLlSSA ^ l d g f c r M' S^auia^ / Apt ) •tltcJ?- Hs J7J Co/- ft i Tpjstfqfi (ttL V/ (Soyy B/^/X?/^ / W k \U-i~ T j ^ r - f t ^ �May 21, 2020 Planning Board Minutes - Exhibit #3 RECEIVED MAY 2 1 2020 NEW YORK STATE OF OPPORTUNITY ANDREW M. CUOMO Governor Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation ERIK KULLESEID Commissioner DR. LUCY R. WALETZKY l a c o n i c Commission, Chair State Council of Parks, Chair LINDA G. COOPER Regional Director May 20, 2020 (sent via email) Honorable Marjorie Hsu Chairperson and Members of the Planning Board Village of Sleepy Hollow 28 Beekman Avenue Sleepy Hollow, New York 10591 Re: Landrock LLC Subdivision Application - 231 Webber Avenue Dear Chairperson Hsu and Members of the Planning Board: Related to the above referenced subdivision, I have become aware of several issues that I would ask the Board to consider. > A requested water connection is immediately adjacent to the Old Croton Aqueduct State Park (OCA), and may connect into a water connection the Village of Sleepy Hollow has inside the OCA. This proximity means the project should be entered into the statewide Cultural Resource Inventory System for review by the State Bureau of Historic Preservation for potential impacts to the OCA for the structural integrity of the aqueduct. > Gory Brook Road enters the Rockefeller State Park Preserve and is a major connector for the residents of Sleepy Hollow and others into the Preserve, It is an unimproved road that serves the needs of pedestrians, equestrians and carriage drivers in an area of great pastoral beauty. This area of the Preserve is extraordinarily busy with both visitors to the OCA and the Rockefeller State Park Preserve. If altered from its current use to allow vehicular traffic it would sigxiificantly alter the park experience that is treasured by village residents and others. We would like to see Gory Brook Road along its border with Douglas Park and Sleepy Hollow Cemetery be kept as it currently functions as a nonvehicular road. New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Taconic Regional Offices: PO Box 308, Staatsburg, New York 12580 • (845) 889-4100 • parks.ny.gov �Sleepy Hollow Planning Board May 2 0 , 2 0 2 0 Page 2 > Likewise, the introduction of any road from the subdivision into this same unimproved road will create a conflict of uses in a pedestrian environment. We would like to see any road uses into Gory Brook Road remain unimproved and for occasional use, such farm equipment rather than a highly trafficked thoroughfare. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute some thoughts regarding this proposed subdivision. We would welcome any discussion you would like to have with State Parks. Sincerely, Linda g. Cooper Linda G. Cooper Regional Director cc: Peter Iskenderian, Rockefeller State Park Preserve Manager Steve Oakes, Old Croton Aqueduct State Historic Park Manager Clinton Smith, Village Attorney, Sleepy Hollow Sean E. McCarthy, Village Architect, Sleepy Hollow Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board of Sleepy Hollow (original signature scanned and sent as well) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2020 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_2020-05-21 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2020 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2020 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text